The Lessons of Valdez

Either inept or virtually invisible at the outset, the Exxon Corp. ‘s public relations campaign to offset the stigma of the Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska’s Prince William Sound last March 24 seems to be working at last. There is a growing body of opinion being expressed in the media that Exxon probably has done as well as anyone could have in coping with the awful mess left by millions of gallons of Alaska North Slope crude oil along 1,100 miles of pristine Alaskan shoreline. And those considered to be experts are now saying that much of the cleanup was wasted effort that achieved little other than to scare eagles and other wildlife out of their wits.

Exxon also seems to have impressed many that the firm has thrown at least $1 billion into the oil- recovery effort and that the total bill may reach $2 billion. Exxon now claims to have “environmentally stabilized” all but about 50 of the 1,100 miles of marred coastline, and the Coast Guard seems to be buying that line. But the state of Alaska has not. Neither, fortunately, has Environmental Protection Agency Administrator William K. Reilly, who said Sunday that “the job isn’t done.” And a National Park Service official, referring to 300 miles of blackened beach in Katmai National Park, told The Times, “There is still a lot of oil out there.”

Exxon has demobilized its cleanup effort in the face of oncoming fall and winter storms and clearly hopes that the waves will pound away much of the remaining stain on the beaches. As with so many aspects of this unprecedented accident, however, no one knows if that will happen. One National Park Service official says there is the possibility that the waves merely will churn up the oil that has seeped into the beach and wash it into shoreline salt ponds where grizzly bears come in the spring to feed. Exxon’s responsibility to Alaska remains as long as there is oil on any beach.

Katmai National Park, by the way, may provide an interesting laboratory test of various cleanup efforts. Generally, the Park Service did not use high-pressure hoses to wash down the oil. Most of the work was done by shovel. No chemical dispersants were spread. It will be instructive to compare the Katmai beaches next year with those where other methods were employed. But currently approved research funds run out at the end of February. Congress should make certain that research work is continued, particularly on the long-range effect on wildlife and tidal-life zones.

Americans should not be lulled into the belief that the Exxon Valdez spill really wasn’t so bad after all, that only a tiny portion of the state’s coastline was despoiled and that Exxon threw so much money at the problem that everything possible was done to clean the shore. Everyone in the Lower 48 states, and most particularly Congress and the Bush Administration, owe it to Alaskans--and themselves--not to forget the damage that may be caused to the environment and wildlife for years to come. Nor should they forget the false promises about the safety of the oil-transportation system that permitted the accident to happen in the first place and then to get totally out of hand. Nor should they believe that the industry’s proposed $250-million accident-response plan will adequately protect the coast.

Throwing money at a problem will not solve it, whether it is government money or capitalist money. From now on, the federal government must strictly regulate and zealously monitor every oil production and transportation project in federal jurisdiction, and develop a response program that will seal off any spill as quickly as possible. The nation has trusted the genius of private enterprise to develop its public energy resources, but it can never again delegate the duty of ensuring that development is achieved as safely as possible.